Capital shocks, bank asset allocation, and the revised Basel Accord

In contrast to the 1988 Basel Accord (Basel I), the revised risk-based capital standards (Basel II) propose regulatory capital requirements based on credit ratings. This paper develops a theoretical model to analyze how banks will adjust their low and high credit risk commercial loans under the proposed newer standard. Capital-constrained banks respond to an adverse capital shock by reducing high credit risk loans, while under certain circumstances, low credit risk loans may actually increase. When compared to Basel I, it is shown that high-risk loans are reduced more under Basel II, but whether a bank reduces total lending more under Basel I or under the revised standards depends on a complex interaction of factors.     

Theories of bank behavior under capital regulation

This paper reviews academic studies of bank capital regulation in an effort to evaluate the intellectual foundation for the imposition of the Basel I and Basel II systems of risk-based capital requirements. The theoretical literature yields general agreement about the immediate effects of capital requirements on bank lending and loan rates and the longer-term impacts on bank ratios of equity to total or risk-adjusted assets. This literature produces highly mixed predictions, however, regarding the effects of capital regulation on asset risk and overall safety and soundness for the banking system as a whole. Thus, the intellectual foundation for the present capital-regulation regime is not particularly strong. The mixed conclusions in the academic literature on banking certainly do not provide unqualified support for moving to an even more stringent and costly system of capital requirements. These widely ambiguous results do suggest, however, that assessing the implications of capital regulation for balance-sheet risk and monitoring effort in diverse banking systems is an important agenda for future theoretical research in the banking area.     

货币政策操作需要考虑银行资本监管吗

持续宽松的货币政策与巴塞尔协议下银行资本监管的共同作用,可能是本次美国次贷危机产生和经济持续波动的主因之一。巴塞尔协议下的银行资本监管,较大地改变了信贷资金的流向和经济运行规律,从而必然影响到货币政策发挥作用的基础条件与传导途径。本文结合经济周期对银行资本约束下的IS-LM模型进行了扩展分析,发现银行资本约束会通过影响银行信贷渠道使货币政策产生非对称性效果,从理论上论证了货币政策的操作必须考虑银行资本监管。本文还运用随机前沿分析(SFA)方法检验了2000～2009年我国货币政策与银行资本监管联合效率,表明在引入银行资本监管后货币政策实现经济目标的联合效率下降。因此,为了达到稳定物价与产出的总体目标,在货币政策反应函数中必须考虑银行资本及其监管状况。     

Regulatory and “economic” solvency standards for internationally active banks

One of the most important policy issues for financial authorities is to decide at what level average capital charges should be set. The decision may alternatively be expressed as the choice of an appropriate survival probability for representative banks over a horizon such as a year, often termed a “solvency standard”. This article sheds light on the solvency standards implied by current and possible future G10 bank regulation and on the “economic solvency standard” that banks choose themselves by their own capital setting decisions. In particular, we employ a credit risk model to show that the survival probability implied by the 1988 Basel Accord is between 99.0% and 99.9%. We then demonstrate that if a new Basel Accord were calibrated to such a standard, it would not represent a binding constraint on banks' current operations since most banks employ a solvency standard higher than 99.9%. To show this, we employ a statistical analysis of bank ratings adjusted for the impact of official or other support as well as credit risk model calculations. Lastly, we advance a possible explanation for the conservative capital choices made by banks by showing that swap volumes are highly correlated with credit quality for given bank size. This suggests that banks' access to important credit markets like the swaps markets may provide a significant discipline in the choice of solvency standard.     

Basel II and bank lending to emerging markets: Evidence from the German banking sector

This paper investigates whether the new Basel Accord will induce a change in bank lending to emerging markets using a comprehensive new data set on German banks’ foreign exposure. We test two interlinked hypotheses on the conditions under which the change in the regulatory capital would leave lending flows unaffected. This would be the case if (i) the new regulatory capital requirement remains below the economic capital and (ii) banks’ economic capital to emerging markets already adequately reflects risk. On both accounts the evidence indicates that the new Basel Accord should have a limited effect on lending to emerging markets.     

《新资本协议》对商业银行信贷运行的影响——兼论其宏观经济效应

《新资本协议》的出台和实施是银行监管历史上一个具有里程碑意义的事件。本文认为,《新资本协议》特别是内部评级法极大地提高了资本监管的风险敏感度,将对商业银行的信贷增长方式、信贷结构调整和贷款损失准备计提、以及宏观经济运行产生一定的影响。按照目前我国商业银行资本充足水平和资产质量,无论是实施标准法还是内部评级法都将强化信贷扩张的资本约束效应。我国应慎重选择《新资本协议》的实施时机,避免由此对信贷供给和宏观经济运行造成的负面冲击。     

Use of loan loss provisions for capital, earnings management and signalling by Australian banks

This study examines whether and to what extent Australian banks use loan loss provisions (LLPs) for capital, earnings management and signalling. We examine if there were changes in the use of LLPs as a result of the implementation of banking regulations consistent with the Basel Accord of 1988, which made loan loss reserves no longer part of Tier I capital in the numerator of the capital adequacy ratio. We find some evidence to indicate that Australian banks use LLPs for capital management, but we find no evidence of a change in this behaviour after the implementation of the Basel Accord. Our results indicate that banks in Australia use LLPs to manage earnings. Furthermore, listed commercial banks engage more aggressively in earnings management using LLPs than unlisted commercial banks. We also find that earnings management behaviour is more pronounced in the post‐Basel period. Overall, we find a significant understating of LLPs in the post‐Basel period relative to the pre‐Basel period. This indicates that reported earnings might not reflect the true economic reality underlying those numbers. Finally, Australian banks do not appear to use LLPs for signalling future intentions of higher earnings to investors.     

Procyclicality,Bank Lending,and the Macroeconomic Implications of a Revised Basel Accord

Bank regulators are in the process of implementing revised regulatory capital standards. However, the macroeconomic effects of a revised Basel Accord are uncertain. Examining the various channels through which the revised Accord may influence economic output suggests that making the buffer stock of capital positively related to the business cycle is necessary to reduce procyclicality. This can be accomplished by bank regulators using either enhanced supervisory powers or increased financial disclosure.     

巴塞尔协议Ⅲ、风险厌恶与银行绩效——基于中国商业银行2004～2008年面板数据的实证分析

依据巴塞尔协议III标准,中国银监会推出的四大监管工具将会对中国商业银行产生怎样的影响?首先,借鉴CAPM模型,理论分析发现,资本充足率要求监管下的破产概率的均衡解要小于无资本充足率要求监管下的均衡解。其次,选取29家中国商业银行样本,用Z-score测度银行风险厌恶程度,实证分析发现,Z-score与资本充足率呈正相关,且与流动比呈负相关;绩效与Z-score和流动比呈正相关,且与贷款拨备率呈负相关。总之,四大监管工具的实施与管理,有利于提高Z-score,增大风险厌恶程度,降低破产概率,提高银行绩效。     

Risk management versus operational action: Basel II in a Swedish context

The New Basel Capital Accord, Basel II, promotes standards for measurement of financial and operational risk in the banking industry. Its approach to such risk measurement has been severely criticized in the literature, inevitably raising doubts concerning the effectiveness of Basel II. Using data from 25 semi-structured interviews with banking staff in four Swedish banks, the study suggests that Basel II is well established in practice, but there are significant concerns that such measurement of risk may adversely affect banks’ activities. Whilst Basel II is generally supported by banking staff who work directly with risk measurement, its usefulness is questioned by banking staff in operations. This difference between these two groups may be explained in relation to variations in their respective frames of reference. Both groups are inclined to take account of information that meshes well with their existing frames of reference and are thus more inclined to value changes that accord with their own viewpoints. One suggestion for addressing this schism within banks is to encourage a wider debate about the various approaches to implementing Basel II.     

反思金融危机中的巴塞尔协议——基于金融理论界长期批判的跟踪

本文主要对巴塞尔协议指引下的资本监管模式在这场危机中的负面作用进行理论研究的梳理,并提出我们的观点。尽管巴塞尔协议在提高银行业风险管理水平上功不可没,但是我们认为,该协议倡导的以资本充足率为导向的金融监管却出现了三个未曾预料的负面效应,即监管套利效应、信贷紧缩效应和亲经济周期效应。它们在客观上参与酿成这场特殊的金融危机,并推动了金融危机向经济危机的转化,因此我们有必要对金融危机中的巴塞尔协议进行反思。     

A Critique of Revised Basel II

This paper critiques the revised Basel II capital requirements for banks. To provide a framework for analysis, the XYZ theory of regulatory capital is formulated. Independent of the XYZ theory, we argue that the revised Basel II capital rule for credit risk is not a good approximation to the ideal rule. Based on this, and using the XYZ theory, we argue that: (1) the revised Basel II rules should not replace the existing approaches for determining minimal capital standards, but should be used in conjunction with them, and (2) that calibrating the capital rules to maintain aggregate market capital is a prudent procedure.     

The New Basel Capital Accord: Making it Effective with Stronger Market Discipline

In January 2001 the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision proposed a new capital adequacy framework to respond to deficiencies in the 1988 Capital Accord on credit risk. The main elements or 'pillars' of the proposal are capital requirements based on the internal risk-ratings of individual banks, expanded and active supervision, and information disclosure requirements to enhance market discipline. We discuss the incentive effects of the proposed regulation. In particular, we argue that it provides incentives for banks to develop new ways to evade the intended consequences of the proposed regulation. Supervision alone cannot prevent banks from 'gaming and manipulation' of risk-weights based on internal ratings. Furthermore, the proposed third pillar to enhance market discipline of banks' risk-taking is too weak to achieve its objective. Market discipline can be strengthened by a requirement that banks issue subordinated debt. We propose a first phase for introducing a requirement for large banks to issue subordinated debt as part of the capital requirement.     

我国政策性银行的资本管理：问题与对策

2007年以来的全球性金融危机,使得金融监管成为业界关注的焦点.顺应金融监管的要求,巴塞尔委员会出台了针对银行资本要求更加严格的巴塞尔协议Ⅲ.在这一背景下,我国的政策性银行也应该重新审视自身的资本管理水平,本文通过对我国政策性银行在资本管理方面现状的描述,揭示其中存在的问题,并给出了完善我国政策性银行资本管理的对策建议,以期对我国政策性银行未来的资本管理贡献“正能量”.     

中国实施巴塞尔新资本协议的战略构想

纵观国际银行业,巴塞尔新资本协议在未来几年内全球范围实施已成定局。中国作为当今世界上最具经济活力和增长潜力的国家,对这一问题应该有一个明确、积极和务实的态度。本文从实际出发,结合新资本协议的技术要求,探讨了中国银行业实施内部评级法在战略上的必要性、可行性,提出了一些有价值的政策建议。     

Risk-based capital requirements for mortgage loans

We contribute to the debate over the reform of the Basel Accord by developing risk-based capital requirements for mortgage loans held in portfolio by financial intermediaries. Our approach employs simulation of both economic variables that affect default incidence and conditional loss probability distributions. Results indicate that appropriate capital charges for credit risk vary substantially with loan characteristics and portfolio geographic diversification. Hence, rules that offer little risk differentiation, including the current Basel I regime and “standardized” approach proposed in Basel II result in significant divergence between regulatory and economic capital. These results highlight the incentive problems inherent in simplified methods of capital regulation.     

我国银行业市场约束对监管有效性的影响分析

巴塞尔新协议中．市场约束与最低资本要求、监督检查并列为三大支柱。市场约束可实时、连续地对银行产生影响,可以弥补创新监管和突发性风险处置滞后的缺憾,可大幅降低监管的成本、抑制银行的道德风险,对提高监管有效性具有积极意义。本文主要研究了当前我国银行业的市场约束力,分析其对监管有效性的影响．并提出相关政策建议。     

次贷危机对新资本协议实施的影响

本文以风险管理为切入点,讨论次贷危机与新资本协议之间的关系,试图回答业界对新资本协议制度合理性的某些质疑。与1988年资本协议相比,新资本协议建立了更具灵活性、适应性和前瞻性的资本监管制度,赋予资本充足率更加丰富的风险管理内涵,为商业银行改进风险管理提供了正向激励;次贷危机不仅未否认新资本协议的合理性,反而进一步凸现了全面实施新资本协议的重要性;新资本协议应顺应金融创新的趋势,吸取次贷危机的教训,做出适应性调整;虽然实施新资本协议不可能阻止金融危机再度发生,但可以提升银行体系应对外部冲击的能力,至少可以缓解未来金融危机的破坏力,从而提高社会福利。     

On the Role of Regulatory Banking Capital

In this paper the authors study the role of regulatory banking capital and analyze the incentive effects of the Basel II Accord. They argue that Basel II may become a source of systemic risk due to endogenous risk and the risk sensitivity of the capital requirements. In this context they note that financial instability may enter via the asset side of the banks' balance sheets when banks are forced to sell assets in order to maintain the capital buffer prescribed by Basel II.     

A note on foreign bank ownership and monitoring: An international comparison

This paper empirically analyzes the relation between foreign bank ownership and the three pillars of the New Basel Capital Accord (i.e., capital regulatory oversight, supervisory oversight, and market discipline). Using a new database covering 153 countries, we find that countries with greater market discipline have a lower presence of foreign banks operating in their economy. Furthermore, our evidence indicates that capital regulatory oversight and supervisory oversight are not significantly related to foreign bank ownership.